Thursday, October 22


“Having a following doesn’t just make patronage work, or let you take creative risks in product monetisation; it’s also a responsibility.”
Sunday, October 04

Matt Gemmell’s ‘Negotiations’

Matt Gemmell’s post on the ad blocking controversy should be required reading for any and all parties entering the discussion:

In order to work out why people are angry about blockers – beyond the simple reality that people are taking their content for free, and bypassing their means of compensation – we have to look to the think-pieces sprouting daily that try to introduce a moral element to the issue. The moral angle says that ad-blocking is in some sense wrong, and is akin (and tantamount) to theft. Theft is probably morally wrong in most circumstances, thus we have our conclusion.

But that’s some intellectual sleight of hand.

It may be correct for you, if you agree with the assumptions it makes, but it’s still a crooked argument for not addressing those assumptions. So let’s briefly do that. The two main assumptions being made are of implicit contract, and of implicit consent. And they’re big ones.